3 ms·
Mind that the Windows side is using a very old version of Chocolate Doom, presumably because the versions using SDL 1.x at least had a fighting chance of runnin
by chungy 6y ago
Mind that the Windows side is using a very old version of Chocolate Doom, presumably because the versions using SDL 1.x at least had a fighting chance of running on Windows 95 (even though it was never actually supported)[0]. SDL 1.x has the other side effect of not running on Windows 10 very well, if at all.
Windows 95 compatibility might be neat, but it's probably better if it used the SDL2-based Chocolate Doom 3.0.1.
[0] https://www.chocolate-doom.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#Can_Chocolate_Doom_be_run_on_Win95.2F98.2FMe.3F https://www.chocolate-doom.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ#Can_Chocol...
- prvc 6y agoAnd for DOS, there is FastDoom (https://github.com/viti95/FastDoom https://github.com/viti95/FastDoom )!
- nneonneo 6y agoFWIW, it does work on Windows 95 (at least in QEMU). Old builds of Windows 95 might need msvcrt.DLL, but that’s it as far as dependencies go. It did require a custom build of libSDL with a few tweaks.
- int_19h 6y agoWhat's the problem with SDL 1.2 on Win10? The latter should still DirectDraw.